User:Sydneg/reflection

“What you give is what you get” hinges on the idea the energy put into something is the energy one gets in return. As a newbie to the Wikipedia community, I learned that my contributions (or lack of) could affect my experience. In other words, what I gave and the motivations to be an active or inactive member ultimately dictated my overall experience. After four months of learning about the Wikipedia community and having written an article for a class, I found that giving is necessary for a conducive relationship within this community.

Given that I joined the Wikipedia community for a class, my experiences and contributions are different in comparison to Wikipedians that participate for other reasons. When I first joined Wikipedia, I was expected to learn the basics of the community and get acquainted with the features in my sandbox and talk page. I found that a feature like this was a productive way of addressing newcomers like me because it let me learn and experiment with Wikipedia^[1]. I can imagine that this feature has a similar effect to other newcomers for Wikipedia to help them with their comfort level. However, since I was part of a class, I was expected to complete a tutorial on Wikipedia’s education dashboard. I also had classmates or my professor I could ask a question if I didn’t know how to do something. Having people in a physical space to go to for help is a significant advantage that other newcomers wouldn’t necessarily have.

Additionally, Shalor was a big help because she made my experience with Wikipedia quite seamless. For example, she posted on my talk page, introducing herself as a resource and included links I could use for help. I don’t think regular Wikipedians get this level of community support right off the bat, which means that they have to go out of their way to learn about Wikipedia’s culture and dynamics. In other words, the level of effort I put in from the beginning might differ from another newcomer that isn’t part of a class, which might explain why I lacked the motivation to be a more active Wikipedian.

Kraut and Resnick claim that “entry barriers for newcomers may cause those who join [a community] to be more committed to the group and contribute more to it”^[2]. In the context of Wikipedia, I think that this holds considering I am an example of the opposite of this claim.^{[clarification needed]} I would say that there were very few entry barriers for me as a newcomer to the Wikipedia community. Again, I had a knowledgable professor (and Wikipedian), classmates, librarians (Amanda and Brook), and Shalor, who offered an abundance of help and guidance. One would think that with the amount of support, I should be a more active community member, but I think this speaks to my intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Becoming a Wikipedian became more of a task for class (extrinsic), rather than something I wanted to do for personal reasons such as spreading knowledge or the desire to contribute to the Wikipedia community (intrinsic). In the years that I’ve had access to the Internet, I’ve known about Wikipedia, and it’s collaboration feature, and there must be a reason why I was never drawn to join this community. Does that say something about my personality? Or something about Wikipedia? That’s not to say that the guidance and support I was offered was completely ineffective; having a community outside of the platform made Wikipedia seem more accessible than it once was to me. Which is to say, that if in the future I ever want to be a committed Wikipedian, I can thank this class for that because I know how to be a part of this community.

My desire to be a more committed and helpful Wikipedian is something that I’ve felt for a long time, especially after drafting my first article. This sentiment partially speaks to Kraut and Resnick’s design claim that “forcing potential new members to undertake separating tasks will encourage those who are a good fit for the community to join while weeding out undesirables.^[2] The idea of separating tasks for a newcomer may have the effect of weeding out undesirables, however, would the same apply for someone who is assigned to edit or contribute for a class? There’s a fine line. Editing and contributing exposed me to the feeling that results from contributing to a community, which I think is the goal for separating tasks. Hence my desire to be a more active Wikipedian. I enjoyed editing and engaging with other Wikipedians’ work; however, because it was assigned, I’m less likely to edit articles out of my own will. With that in mind, I have to ask myself if I should be “weeded” out of this community because I sense that after this class is over, I might not edit another article. Regardless of my experience, I think encouraging tasks effectively weeds out undesirables because if one is unwilling to put in the work that comes with being a member of the community, they’re less likely to return. There is the caveat, however, that members must learn how to complete these tasks before getting to the point where they’re considered undesirable.

Wikipedia has “frequently asked question” talk pages and articles to help new members become acquainted with the community. The Teahouse is one example where existing members help newcomers with questions they might have about editing and articles. In theory, this is a fantastic feature for newcomers, but I can’t speak to how useful it is given that I’ve never used it. For the most part, if I didn’t know how to do something on Wikipedia, I would consult my professor or a classmate. I wonder if I didn’t have my classmates to consult, would I be more prone to ask Wikipedians for help, or figure it out myself? Outside of this class, I would resort to figuring it out myself before asking a member of the community. My attitude towards asking for help might be why the “RTFM” culture exists in online communities. “RTFM is commonly used in online communities to advise people to try to help themselves before seeking assistance from others”.^[3] Community members may expect other members to try and figure things out for themselves because they’re projecting their attitude onto others. Although I’ve never been told to “RTFM” by a Wikipedian, I can imagine asking a simple question would merit embarrassment or criticism because there’s this idea that if the person I’m asking was able to figure it out themselves, then I should be able to as well. In the grand scheme of things, projecting this attitude can be detrimental to a community because it doesn’t welcome newcomers. Newcomers may feel attacked and may be deterred from further contributing, or worse learning. On the flip side, I was not treated with this attitude, and I’m not as committed to Wikipedia as other members are. Maybe RTFM holds some merit and is needed to cultivate a community of devoted members.  

Newcomers should learn things for themselves because it is part of entering a new community. As described by Coleman in Reagle’s article, “ethical enculturation” is the idea that newcomers learn the explicit and tacit knowledge (be it technical, social, or ideological) needed to effectively interact with other project members and gain acceptance^[1]. My experience is different than other Wikipedians because I quickly learned about Wikipedia culture from a Wikipedian who was also my professor. I have to imagine what it must be like for newcomers without the guidance I had, and I think it can be daunting. What if a newcomer doesn’t know that they must act in good faith? What if a newcomer doesn’t know that there’s specific editing etiquette? Certainly, they’d learn the hard way, but this might dissuade them from coming back because they just risked their passage to acceptance. My experience can’t speak to this dynamic because I never wanted to be accepted into this community; the desire just wasn’t there. Maybe if I made more of an effort to interact with other Wikipedians, I’d feel the social pressures that come with this community. Which brings me back to my initial point: “what you give is what you get”.

In an ideal “Wiki world”, I would make edits to more articles, reach out to other members to seek advice about my article, and share knowledge wherever possible. But that isn’t the case for me. Yes, I wrote an article, made some edits, and thanked a Wikipedian which may seem like I’m an active member, but because these tasks were assigned to me, I don’t think I’m a “real” Wikipedian. That’s not to say these experiences didn’t teach me anything. I was given a taste of what it’s like for real Wikipedians, and I can say I appreciate the work of Wikipedians. However, it’s hard to ignore the barriers for newcomers like me, especially when it comes to learning about the community culture and attitude. Despite these barriers, if someone wants to be a part of Wikipedia truly, they must make a concerted effort to assimilate and learn about what they’re getting themselves into.